Yardball85
-
Posts
3734 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Yardball85
-
-
The Brewers have signed Daniel Robertson.
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/01/brewers-to-sign-daniel-robertson.html
I could not care less about "losing" the opportunity to sign Robertson, but here it is.
-
3 hours ago, Sports Guy said:
FTFY.
Thanks SG.
-
1
-
-
To the extent it doesn't go without saying, Davis should start once every two weeks at most.
-
I think until Diaz arrives, your alignment sounds right. I would hope once Diaz arrives we have Diaz in left, Hays in Center, Santander in right, Mountcastle/Mancini at 1B/DH. With Stewart sprinkled in and Mullins getting starts in CF from tiem to time.
-
1
-
-
23 hours ago, wildcard said:
OP says for the division.
That's fine. My opinion and my post still stand.
-
2
-
-
If they do this right, they should be seriously competing for a WC by 2022 and perhaps the division by 2023 (when HK, Henderson, etc. should be up.
-
2
-
-
On 12/25/2020 at 10:35 AM, OldNewGuy said:
Put Ritchie Martin at short for the first 50 to 60 games and see what he’s got. Keep Ruiz at third, and Sanchez at second. With Davis at first you have a solid field no hit infield. Just rely on analytics to position the infielders. All they need is an accurate arm so they don’t throw too many balls away and soft hands to pickup the balls hit at them. Don’t need great range. Pitchers are expected to strike out at least one batter per inning so don’t need as good an infield defense as before. Less ground balls to be fielded. Valaika can be subbed at any position and could still get his AB’s. That way, the Orioles can save 2.5 million on a ss and be just as good as if they did spend the money. Winning is not the objective in 2021.
I have no problem with Ruiz, Martin, and Sanchez if that is what they decide. But there is no way Chris Davis should be getting regular starts at first base this year. It should be Mancini (health permitting) or Mountcastle. Davis playing first likely means that one of Mancini, Mountcastle, Stewart, and/or Santander is on the bench.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, jamalshw said:
I don't think any of those names would yield much at the deadline regardless of the season they're having. I also don't think they're looking for a SS to flip, but rather one to stabilize the infield a bit for the young pitchers. (Of course, if they got a deal they liked I'm sure they'd move whomever they get at the deadline--like they did with Iglesias this winter). Galvis is who I ultimately expect us to sign. But I'm not sure it really matters.
I have no disagreement with anything in your post.
-
1
-
-
Per Roch, O's are considering Villar, Robertson, Galvis. Just for the sage of nostalgia, I'd be fine with Villar on a one year deal. I doubt we'd get much for him at the deadline, considering we didn't get much for him after his big 2019.
-
12 hours ago, Frobby said:
If the Indians didn’t want Rosario, why was he included in the trade?
Probably because he's redundant on the Mets with Lindor, so they wanted to move him. Maybe the Indians think they can get something if they flip him, or try him out in the middle with Gimenez. The real gem of the trade was Gimenez for sure.
-
2 hours ago, bpilktree said:
I don’t see why you would add Rosario as he is just average to below level shortstop who is arbitration eligible and expected to make 1.25-1.5 million this year. If they are getting him I see more of thought he bounce back this year and guy you can get more back in a trade next year. The Indians also have Yu Chang who is 25 has not had success at major league level but been decent player at AAA who looks to be pushed out here and might make more sense as cheap replacement.
For sure, yeah. I'm not beating the drum for this guy or anything. I have a good friend who is a Mets fan and he talks up Rosario a lot. Just wanted to hear everyone's opinions.
-
30 minutes ago, murph said:
Only name I really cared about seeing was Mountcastle. Get that guy as many reps as possible! Would be great if he could become an average left fielder.
I agree for the most part. Nice to see they want to get Diaz some reps. Really hope we see him in the majors this summer.
-
17 minutes ago, oriole said:
I’d rather play Martin full time than send any level prospect for a not so great SS who is entering arbitration.
With that being said, I’d welcome the idea if we were to claim him and get him for nothing.
Fair point. I think I'd still rather see him over Martin, though.
-
The Mets are getting Lindor and Carrasco for a package including Rosario, Gimenez, Greene, and Josh Wolf. I would imagine the Indians want to play the better prospect, Gimenez. What would it take to get Rosario for the O's? Bad 2020 with 0 WAR, but a solid 2019 with a .755 OPS and 2.2 WAR. Defensive numbers aren't as good as I had hoped. Thoughts?
-
Whatever you wanna call it - my god, this offseason could not possibly be any more boring.
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, Frobby said:
A few of the pitchers:
Means 4.90 ERA
Akin 5.00
Cobb 5.27
Kremer 5.46
Tanner Scott is the only pitcher on the whole staff ZiPS projects at a sub-4.00 ERA, at 3.70.
The offensive projections seem a lot more realistic than the pitching projections, but we'll see. Kremer and Akin looked good, but it was obviously SSS.
-
17 hours ago, Philip said:
This is starting to get fun.
so to clarify. You don’t want the Orioles to sign Santana. You don’t want them to spend 17 million on a guy who won’t help the Team improve meaningfully.....um... so you want us to spend 17 million on a guy who WILL help the team meaningfully? Great. And that would be whom, pray tell?
Ok. Let’s assume there is such a guy, and we sign such a guy, even though he won’t help the team meaningfully. What he WILL do is cost 17 million, and take playing time away from the youngsters. I would rather see the youngsters.(I wanted to see David Hess until he showed he was terrible. I had to continue to see him for too long after that but at least I know he’s terrible, and that’s time well spent.)
And again, one guy wouldn’t help. Our Lord Himself can’t help yet because he’s only one guy, and one guy, even of such Lofty abilities, won’t pull the team out of the doldrums yet. The best player in baseball history hasn’t helped the Angels out of THEIR Doldrums.
It is not logical to sign one guy that fits the “17 million for Santana even though he won’t meaningfully help the Royals,” concept. Because he’ll be wasted money, and he won’t fix anything.
We need to sign cheap flyers like Karns and Milone and Iglesias, give paying time to our youngsters, and acquire talent. It’s a 9- man team. We need 9 solid guys, and we cannot acquire them in one offseason. We just can’t. That’s why the offseason is hard. We just aren’t ready yet.
Thats just the way the ball rolls these days.
Enjoy the teething pains of the young guys, send the bad ones away to make room for more young guys, and rejoice when John Means 2.0 and 3.0 reveal themselves.
What SG is saying (and I agree with him) is you can sign guys who won't block the young players from getting experience (a decent SP, for instance) or a decent middle infielder so the team is competitive and you give the fans something to be excited about. Elias is just spitting in the fans faces with offseasons like this and just being like, here's another losing season. In other words, you can make the team bearable to watch/not awful, while still doing the rebuild the right way. Would I sign Santana? No. Would I sign someone else for $10-15M to help the team until all the young guys get here? Sure.
-
There goes Fenter to the Cubs.
-
As far as I'm concerned, it's only a problem if the team gives him at bats (i.e. more than 1-2 ABs a week).
-
1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:
Why would he agree?
I think if you pay him well enough for that second year, he would strongly consider it. There's a decent chance that the Archer we've seen on the Pirates over the last few years is what he has become, and he would secure two years of salary when perhaps, he'd be out of baseball next year.
-
1 hour ago, weams said:
I'd like to see an incentive laiden TWO year deal for Archer.
-
4 hours ago, ScGO's said:
Who is out there that may be entertained by a bad contract for a bad contract trade? Is it worth looking into at this point? We'd probably have to sacrifice two years of Davis for 3 years of someone not quite as terrible, but probably a big waste of money. Might be able to get lucky and trade someone if they bounce back. Anything seem realistic below?
Miguel Cabrera, Jason Heyward, or Joey Votto till 2023?
Robinson Cano till 2023 minus his 2021 salary due to suspension?
Myers or Hosmer from SD?
Longoria? We could use a 3B.
Would Boston be trying to get out of the Sale contract?
Justin Upton?
Odor and Andrus in exchange for Davis? Give us an expensive middle infield for two years, but at least they are stable options.
No. Davis is literally the worst contract ever, and many of us, including myself, were weary of that before the ink dried in 2016. Any team that acquires his contract, even in a salary dump on their end, should fire their GM immediately.
-
4 hours ago, Sports Guy said:
I take yellow, because that would have had positive ramifications for several years, whereas blue, which is second place, maybe gets us past KC (maybe, as w were swept) and maybe gives us a chance against the Giants in the WS. Yellow for me.
-
Stallings is their 21st ranked prospect https://www.mlb.com/prospects/angels/garrett-stallings-668831
Pinto seems like a lottery ticket.
Cool.
-
3
-
The Shortstop Market
in Orioles Talk
Posted
Yeah, I heard Robertson was going to give us a .500 OBP out of the leadoff spot and GG defense. Oh well. There's always 2022.